Earl Hollis, Inc. v. Fraser Mortgage Co.
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
While the final argument of defendant’s counsel was egregiously improper, we find that the plaintiff specifically waived the right to a mistrial on that ground below and therefore may not insist upon the issue on appeal. Diaz v. Rodriguez, 384 So.2d 906 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); 3 Fla.Jur.2d Appellate Review § 292 (1978); see State v, Cumbie, 380 So.2d 1031 (Fla.1980). The other points raised present no error.
AFFIRMED.
GLICKSTEIN, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur. LETTS, C. J., dissents with opinion.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. CumbieSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
- Diaz v. RodriguezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ed Ricke & Sons v. Green by and Through SwanSupreme Court of Florida · 1985
- Green v. Ed Ricke and Sons, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
- Nable v. Estate of GodfreyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981
- IDY Corp. v. EngelsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984